Anonymous wrote:I think you all are acting like the school board here, focusing on the wrong damn things. Your kids are going to face serious challenges in the future - climate change, civil unrest, possible economic devastation, an ongoing pandemic. Let the books and the school names and the other trivial stuff go. These kids wil need to be smarter and stronger and more capable than previous generations, and right now, administrators who care more about covering their asses or advancing their careers than actually educating children are instituting policies that ensure they will be lazier, dumber, and weaker.

It’s a book. Let it go. If the harshest reality your kid ever has to face is the mere *idea* or *portrayal* of gay sex or pedophilia, then he or she will have a pretty ideal life. I don’t need to be a fortune teller to predict that more harsh realities are in their futures. Don’t get derailed from what needs to be done by this sideshow.

Anonymous wrote:I think you all are acting like the school board here, focusing on the wrong damn things. Your kids are going to face serious challenges in the future - climate change, civil unrest, possible economic devastation, an ongoing pandemic. Let the books and the school names and the other trivial stuff go. These kids wil need to be smarter and stronger and more capable than previous generations, and right now, administrators who care more about covering their asses or advancing their careers than actually educating children are instituting policies that ensure they will be lazier, dumber, and weaker.

It’s a book. Let it go. If the harshest reality your kid ever has to face is the mere *idea* or *portrayal* of gay sex or pedophilia, then he or she will have a pretty ideal life. I don’t need to be a fortune teller to predict that more harsh realities are in their futures. Don’t get derailed from what needs to be done by this sideshow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironic that SB censored the woman's testimony on the video--yet, young children are free to check the books out and read them.

She wasn’t censored. She wouldn’t stop when her time was up. And “young children” don’t go to high school.

Anonymous wrote:Ironic that SB censored the woman's testimony on the video--yet, young children are free to check the books out and read them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK prudes...let's hear:

What is an acceptable age for kids to start masturbating?

What is an acceptable age for kids to start experimenting with sex with peers?

That is not the issue. The issue is the graphic nature of those words and that book. You do know there is a graphic novel she was addressing, as well?

It's exactly the issue.

PP said 9-10 is too young.

How old is not "too young"?

What does that have to do with this book? There are lots of great books to have in a school library. That's not one of them.

Anonymous wrote:Ironic that SB censored the woman's testimony on the video--yet, young children are free to check the books out and read them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point of this circus was not the book. It was the attention.

Exactly. It’s all the GOP knows how to do. Try to whip up some good old-fashioned fearmongering.

If we're talking about FCPS, all the Democrats know how to do is pontificate about equity and hire assorted miscreants who think it's fine to purchase books for school libraries that normalize gay sex involving children still in elementary school.

It is NORMAL and OK for children to experiment with sex. Even gay sex. It is OK for adults in a story to remember those experiences.

Also, gay sex is NORMAL and OK.

Go away, Republican trash.

Not in 4th grade, it isn't.

PS - calling posters "trash" gets your post deleted, you Democrat.

Tons of kids "play doctor" at that age. No big deal.

No honey. They don't. Not at age 9-10.

How old were you when you "played doctor"?

Actually, it was 9 or 10.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK prudes...let's hear:

What is an acceptable age for kids to start masturbating?

What is an acceptable age for kids to start experimenting with sex with peers?

That is not the issue. The issue is the graphic nature of those words and that book. You do know there is a graphic novel she was addressing, as well?

It's exactly the issue.

PP said 9-10 is too young.

How old is not "too young"?

What does that have to do with this book? There are lots of great books to have in a school library. That's not one of them.

Then don’t read it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK prudes...let's hear:

What is an acceptable age for kids to start masturbating?

What is an acceptable age for kids to start experimenting with sex with peers?

That is not the issue. The issue is the graphic nature of those words and that book. You do know there is a graphic novel she was addressing, as well?

It's exactly the issue.

PP said 9-10 is too young.

How old is not "too young"?

What does that have to do with this book? There are lots of great books to have in a school library. That's not one of them.

Anonymous wrote:What a bunch of immature parents fighting about what she should have done, etc... We have two threads running on this forum, because she got the attention to this, if not, no body would have bothered.

Coming to the books, I don' think they belong in school, period. Schools instead are becoming trash day by day.

Whoever approved them are sick idiots, playing with children's minds. They can watch whatever on the internet, tv, movies at their own time.. But, encouraging these kind of useless trash in school makes them think this is normal at tender age..

What kind of sick people are you. Think about the lines from the book for a second and you will know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK prudes...let's hear:

What is an acceptable age for kids to start masturbating?

What is an acceptable age for kids to start experimenting with sex with peers?

That is not the issue. The issue is the graphic nature of those words and that book. You do know there is a graphic novel she was addressing, as well?

It's exactly the issue.

PP said 9-10 is too young.

How old is not "too young"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point of this circus was not the book. It was the attention.

Exactly. It’s all the GOP knows how to do. Try to whip up some good old-fashioned fearmongering.

If we're talking about FCPS, all the Democrats know how to do is pontificate about equity and hire assorted miscreants who think it's fine to purchase books for school libraries that normalize gay sex involving children still in elementary school.

It is NORMAL and OK for children to experiment with sex. Even gay sex. It is OK for adults in a story to remember those experiences.

Also, gay sex is NORMAL and OK.

Go away, Republican trash.

Not in 4th grade, it isn't.

PS - calling posters "trash" gets your post deleted, you Democrat.

Tons of kids "play doctor" at that age. No big deal.

No honey. They don't. Not at age 9-10.

How old were you when you "played doctor"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK prudes...let's hear:

What is an acceptable age for kids to start masturbating?

What is an acceptable age for kids to start experimenting with sex with peers?

That is not the issue. The issue is the graphic nature of those words and that book. You do know there is a graphic novel she was addressing, as well?